Which Gatsby Is the Greatest? Comparing the Great Gatsby films of 2013 and 1974 with GIFs

On the left, Carey Mulligan as Daisy Buchanan in the 2013 version, and Mia Farrow in the same role in 1974.

Anyone who's familiar with the 1974 version of The Great Gatsby with Robert Redford should recognize the scenes and shots from trailers for the 2013 film, which opens Friday with Leonardo DiCaprio. Here, in animated GIFs, are shot-by-shot comparisons from the 1974 version and the 2013 version -- which will be the fifth film of the Fitzgerald story.

2013:

1974:

One of Gatsby's parties, early in both films.

2013:

1974:

In the film version, one of Gatsby's butlers finds Nick Carraway at the party and escorts him into Gatsby's home, where the two will meet.

We Recommend

I think the key difference
between the two films is 'subtlety'. The 1974 film, though it has been
criticized, is far superior as a film to the 2013 version. The 1974 film is
more faithful to the novel, the characters are, again, closer to the characters
as described by Fitzgerald, and the portrayals of emotion are more subtle. The
scenes that portray the glamor of Gatsby’s life are much more realistic to the
time period portrayed, as are the scenes that portray the squalor and
desperation of Myrtle’s life. The scenes in New York show the beads of sweat on
everyone’s faces, because the fact that it was hot is part of what drives the
plot and the emotions along. God forbid anyone actually sweat in a movie
nowadays. In fact, the 2013 film is a circus … No subtlety, no depth, too loud,
in your face, and over the top. The 2013 Gatsby is made for a generation of
people who don’t read, have no attention span, have no depth or subtlety, and
must be enticed by plastic characters with obvious emotions and by loud glitzy
things in order to get the point. It’s an MTV Gatsby. This is not to say that
the actors were bad. DiCaprio, in particular, did the best he could to bring
some depth of character to an otherwise completely superficial film. The one
actor who, I believe, was completely wrong for the part is Tobey McGuire. There
is nothing that either looks or sounds mature about Tobey McGuire. Nothing
personal but he’s far more convincing as Spider Man than as Nick Carraway. He
looks and speaks like a teenage boy but he was cast, in this movie, to play an
adult and mature character and was completely unconvincing. I had greater hopes
for the 2013 film, when I heard it was coming out. I was hoping that, for
example, it would not shy away (as the 1974 film did) from the novel’s
extremely subtle allusions to Nick Carraway’s homosexuality. Or, at least, to
the one scene in the novel in which there is a possible homosexual encounter
between Nick and one of the guests at Myrtle’s party in New York. Just as it is
easy to understand why Nick falls in love with Gatsby in the novel (for many
different reasons), it is easy to see why Nick would fall for the Redford Gatsby
(and not just because of his looks). It is impossible to understand, however,
why one would fall in love with the DiCaprio Gatsby who, despite his looks, is
a completely uncharming and unvulnerable character.

Let me get this correct. You mean someone set a F. Scott Fitzgerald classic novel to hip-hop, in 3D? Nice! According to Rex Reed, the most accurate movie adaptation is Elliott Nugent’s black-and-white 1949 version.

If you want to read a worthy review of this latest piece of shit, I suggest checking one of the only critics I respect, particularly since Siskel & Ebert are both dead, Rex Reed. He crucifies this latest Gatsby movie. It is quite hilarious. Please, remember, Rex is from Texas, yeeee haawwww.

Sorry, but they lost me at the modern soundtrack, which is just flat-out pandering to young crowds who don't know and don't care anything about the era. Either update the entire thing the way they did with "Romeo and Juliet", or don't update it, but don't look ignorant by mixing eras.